1 CGHC010036232026 2026:CGHC:31528 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPT No. 9 of 2026 * - ND Enterprise Through Dharmeshkumar Thakorlal Thakkar, S/o Thakkar Thakorlal Aged 49 Years, R/o B-502, Shrikunj Apartment Opposite Kanchanbhumi Apartment, Satellite, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 380015. ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Tax Officer State Tax Division- I, Bilaspur (C.G), State GST Office Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra Bilaspur Chhattisgarh- 495001 2 - Joint Commissioner, Bilaspur State GST Office Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra Bilaspur Chhattisgarh- 495001 3 - Deputy Commissioner, Enforcement, Head Office, Nava Raipur 5/6th Floor, Tower- A, CBD Building, Sector 21, Atal Nagar- Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492018 4 - Joint Commissioner, Enforcement, Nava Raipur, 5/6th Floor, Tower- A, CBD Building, Sector 21, Atal Nagar- Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492018 ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Bhishma Ahluwalia and Mr. Dilharan Yadav, Advocates For Respondents/State : Ms. Anuradha Jain, Dy.Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.I It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ in nature of Certiorari and / or any other appropriate writ quashing Order in MOV – 09 dated 19.1.2026 along with entire proceedings; 10.II It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ in nature of Certiorari and / or any other Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.07.24 14:46:07 +0530 2 appropriate writ declaring the detention of vehicle as illegal and without authority of law and quash and set aside any subsequent proceedings or orders passed pursuant to such illegal detention; 10.III This Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Certiorari and / or any appropriate writ quashing the penal proceedings proposed to be initiated under Section 68 and Section 129 against the Petitioner; 10.IV This Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Madamus and / or any appropriate writ directing the Respondents to proceed only in accordance with law while detaining vehicle and proceeding in this matter; 10.V This Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate Writ in the nature of Mandamus and / or any appropriate writ calling of copies of online records prepared, in accordance with law in the instant proceedings; 10.VI This Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to allow any other relief and compensation to the Petitioner for financial loss and hardship suffered due to unlawful and prolonged detention of vehicle; 10.VIIIt is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to impose necessary costs on the Respondents for acting in abuse of power; 10.VIII It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief that may be deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case; 10.IX It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ in nature of Certiorari and / or any other appropriate writ quashing letter dated 17.2.206.” 2. Mr. Mr. Bhishma Ahluwalia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would fairly submit that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner Appeals against the order impugned dated 19.01.2026 passed under the provisions of Section 129 of State Goods and Service Tax. He would contend that the conveyance of the petitioner was seized by the Revenue on 23.12.2025 and pursuant to interim order granted by this Court dated 09.02.2026, it has been 3 released after furnishing bank guarantee to the tune of Rs.8.39 lacs. Mr. Ahluwalia would submit that while preferring appeal before the Commissioner Appeals, the petitioner has deposited 25% of tax penalty with the said Authority. He would contend that this petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to release the bank guarantee of Rs.8.39 lacs furnished by the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, Ms. Anuradha Jain, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents would oppose. Ms. Jain would contend that the vehicle was seized as the petitioner failed to produce relevant documents. She would submit that pursuant to interim order dated 09.02.2026, the conveyance of the petitioner was released after furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.8.39 lacs. She would further contend that as appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending consideration before the Commissioner Appeals and any decision with regard to release of bank guarantee would be taken by the Authority. She would contend that the prayer made by the petitioner may not be allowed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Admittedly, the conveyance of the petitioner was seized by the respondent No. 2 and subsequently it was released pursuant to interim order passed by this Court dated 09.02.2026 after furnishing of bank guarantee of Rs.8.39 lacs. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Commissioner Appeals which is pending consideration and 25% amount of tax penalty has already been deposited by the petitioner as informed by Mr. Ahluwalia. 4 6. Having considered the limited prayer made by Mr. Ahluwalia with regard to release of bank guarantee of Rs.8.39 lacs, this Court deems it fit to issue a direction to respondent No. 2 to release the bank guarantee of Rs.8.39 lacs furnished by the petitioner instead thereof the petitioner shall furnish surety of like sum of amount to the satisfaction of the respondent No. 2. The final decision with regard to seized conveyance etc. shall be subject to final outcome of appeal pending before the Commissioner Appeals. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s) / direction(s), this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti